Why does the music played at AXPONA suck so bad?

[Vuki]

I agree about the music, I'd prefer to listen to music I love on my phone than stuff I find banal and musically uninspiring on a superb system.
The point is many people getting their knickers in a massive twist about small deviations from perfect reproduction. Some even only listen to sh*te music or spend hours measuring and adjusting their system, and therefore not listening to music at all.

I think it comes down to the example I have used often in the past. HiFi enthusiasts exist on a spectrum from most interested in the equipment to most interested in the music.

Audiophiles and music

 

[Johnkeizer]

When I was in our local audio club there were a handful of musical Nazis ( like in most walks of life, the extremists and fundamentalists) who made playing anything outside their approved audiophile recordings a capital crime.
A standing order was no country and western or banjo music.
So when it was my turn to be the host for the club I made a point of including country and western and banjo music.
After all, I was subjected to Jazz At The Pawnshop hundreds of times.

 

[tineared]

When I was in our local audio club there were a handful of musical Nazis ( like in most walks of life, the extremists and fundamentalists) who made playing anything outside their approved audiophile recordings a capital crime.
A standing order was no country and western or banjo music.
So when it was my turn to be the host for the club I made a point of including country and western and banjo music.
After all, I was subjected to Jazz At The Pawnshop hundreds of times.

Earl Scruggs, Steve Martin or Bela Fleck?

 

[Johnkeizer]

Try 20 greatest banjo hits or best of country music.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Audiophiles and music

When I was a student at Imperial College the guy in the neighbouring room in my student accomodation was a wealthy overseas student who was the extreme example of this.
He bought all the magazines, and back then they were still technical reviews so no subjective stuff or snake oil yet, and bought pretty well everything that tested well.
He only had test and demo records.
We were good friends and he was delighted for me to play my LPs on his system. My system then was a Garrard SL75 with ceramic cartidge wired in mono and connected to the microphone input of my mono valve tape recorder (I was already making recordings) and played back with the tape machine on pause, so my records definitely sounded better in his room!

My interest in the equipment stems from being an engineer and music lover and I worked in the business 50 years ago.

 

[Frank Dernie]

I cut losses on both sides of spectrum: I do not want my system to poorly reproduce well recorded music, and I do not want to listen music which was poorly recorded.

I would prefer well recorded music, but I have historic recordings from the days of acoustic recording of Rachmaninof playing his own music, and one dire sounding recording of Mahler himself from around 1903.
I wouldn't be without them, and I wouldn't not listen simply because of poor recording quality.

I have Artur Schnabel live recordings from 70 years ago where the recordings are dire but the musical quality shines through like a spotlight (people referring to a "musical" system really are talking bollox the musical bit is the musician not the hardware).

 

[Frank Dernie]

On the other hand, there still is far too much
“ single breathy singer with sparse accompaniment” stuff being played. It drives me nuts when you encounter a really expensive system with big flagship speakers and you get that kind of stuff played, which any mini monitor could pull off, instead of more dynamic and complex music that would actually show off the design.

This is true, but at least people know what a voice actually sounds like so can judge "highness of fidelity" rather than just impressiveness.

Pretty well everything being recorded today uses electronic instruments and techniques and whilst much sounds great, and is often impressive, a human has no frame of reference to judge its fidelity.

Few people listen to large orchestras live - which would probably be the best way to judge fidelity over a wide frequency and dynamic range - so again, few have a frame of reference to judge fidelity. In any case dynamic music always has the peaks trimmed so the average doesn't sound too quiet - there are a few full dynamic range recordings from early days of digital recording but not many.

So all we can do is decide if it sounds nice and we like it

 

[Johnkeizer]

Recorded sound still has a long way to go before it sounds like the real thing.
So agree, make it sound enjoyable.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Recorded sound still has a long way to go before it sounds like the real thing.
So agree, make it sound enjoyable.

I disagree.
I have recordings that sound like the real thing. Recording and reproducing the spatial aspects is not likely to happen, but getting the frequency and dynamics like the real thing has been done for decades.
True, most commercial recordings are manipulated for one reason or another, but not all.

The big limitation is that few humans have had any experience of what the "real thing" actually sounds like

 

[Mart68]

I disagree.
I have recordings that sound like the real thing. Recording and reproducing the spatial aspects is not likely to happen, but getting the frequency and dynamics like the real thing has been done for decades.
True, most commercial recordings are manipulated for one reason or another, but not all.

The big limitation is that few humans have had any experience of what the "real thing" actually sounds like

I never listen to classical music so how close it gets to the real thing is a total irrelevance to me since there's no 'real thing' to compare to with the music I do listen to. I want to see if the speaker can make a decent fist of heavy rock recordings. If it can't it's no use to me, even though that's maybe only ten percent of my listening.

I can't judge that if all we get as demo music is the breathy female vocalist accompanied by someone knocking on a block of wood with a stick.

Besides I can only think of one occasion at a show where I encountered any orchestral music (on ATCs). Possibly because it's a good way to clear the room. It's a minority interest I think, even amongst the hi-fi crowd.

I did once get a listen to an Audionote system playing some Gregorian Chant but that was a request from a punter. That cleared the room too.

 

[Frank Dernie]

I never listen to classical music so how close it gets to the real thing is a total irrelevance to me since there's no 'real thing' to compare to with the music I do listen to. I want to see if the speaker can make a decent fist of heavy rock recordings. If it can't it's no use to me, even though that's maybe only ten percent of my listening.

I can't judge that if all we get as demo music is the breathy female vocalist accompanied by someone knocking on a block of wood with a stick.

Besides I can only think of one occasion at a show where I encountered any orchestral music (on ATCs). Possibly because it's a good way to clear the room. It's a minority interest I think, even amongst the hi-fi crowd.

I did once get a listen to an Audionote system playing some Gregorian Chant but that was a request from a punter. That cleared the room too.

I understand exactly what you mean, but it does beg the question "what is the point of trying to achieve high fidelity?" if pretty well every punter has no idea what it sounds like.
I agree, all that is really needed for almost every punter is something impressive.

I listen to a wide variety of music at home, but wouldn't dream of trying to judge fidelity using any of my Frank Zappa recordings, but I would with Mahler symphonies and folk music.

Edit to add I am familiar with classical music clearing the room it really is a minority interest, but one could argue that it is only the classical music and acoustic music enthusiasts the really need high fidelity rather than simply impressive sound effects.

 

[Mart68]

I understand exactly what you mean, but it does beg the question "what is the point of trying to achieve high fidelity?" if pretty well every punter has no idea what it sounds like.
I agree, all that is really needed for almost every punter is something impressive.

I listen to a wide variety of music at home, but wouldn't dream of trying to judge fidelity using any of my Frank Zappa recordings, but I would with Mahler symphonies and folk music.

I think that rather than use some notional 'live performance' as a benchmark the vast majority want a comparison between the show system and what system they currently have at home. So we might all yawn when 'Brothers In Arms' or 'Rumours' gets used as a demo but the reality is most people have those records and know how other systems including their own, present them.

I think we can only judge fidelity of the replay with the numbers, the measurements. For listening comparisons it's 'Do I prefer how this recording is presented on my system or on the show system?' A relative, rather than an absolute comparison.

 

[Frank Dernie]

I think that rather than use some notional 'live performance' as a benchmark the vast majority want a comparison between the show system and what system they currently have at home. So we might all yawn when 'Brothers In Arms' or 'Rumours' gets used as a demo but the reality is most people have those records and know how other systems including their own, present them.

I think we can only judge fidelity of the replay with the numbers, the measurements. For listening comparisons it's 'Do I prefer how this recording is presented on my system or on the show system?' A relative, rather than an absolute comparison.

Fair enough, I suppose that is the case for most.
I have a wide taste in music from early music through classical and the rock music of my youth and the folk clubs I spent a lot of time in to the dance music my kids like.
What you write is pretty well spot on for most of that but not all, and the music which I listen to half the time benefits from high fidelity, or at least is spoiled a bit by inaccurate sound.
A good example is the preference rating for speaker FR and the bass shelf preferred by many is easy to understand but sounds wrong to me.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

I understand exactly what you mean, but it does beg the question "what is the point of trying to achieve high fidelity?" if pretty well every punter has no idea what it sounds like.

Respectfully, this same question can be asked, respectfully, of anyone in your age range, when hearing is substantially and irrevocably degraded and ears are no longer capable of high fidelity sensitivity.

More importantly, the point of trying to achieve high fidelity for non-classical music is to best reproduce the recording. As I'm sure you agree, music composed in the studio can be art too, with no shortage of richness, depth, complexity, and sophistication. What better reason could there be to want to hear it as it was recorded?

 

[Vuki]

I think that rather than use some notional 'live performance' as a benchmark the vast majority want a comparison between the show system and what system they currently have at home. So we might all yawn when 'Brothers In Arms' or 'Rumours' gets used as a demo but the reality is most people have those records and know how other systems including their own, present them.

I think we can only judge fidelity of the replay with the numbers, the measurements. For listening comparisons it's 'Do I prefer how this recording is presented on my system or on the show system?' A relative, rather than an absolute comparison.

Than it's about My Fi not Hi Fi.

 

[Mart68]

the music which I listen to half the time benefits from high fidelity,

Is fidelity not best judged via measurement though?

I sometimes wonder about that. Modern mastering suites probably use speakers with flat response so it would make sense to use such speakers at home to at least get in the ballpark of reproducing the recording 'as intended'. But then there are all those older recordings mastered on 1960s/1970s Tannoys or JBLs which were not so neutral. Circle of confusion. I don't think there's any solution for that, although in practical terms I don't find it a huge issue.

Last year I moved from fairly large 3 way tower (6 inch mid 2 x 7'' woofers) to much larger 3 way (8 inch mid 1 x 15'' woofer) and was shocked to discover how much low frequency 'information' I'd been missing out on all these years especially in recordings from the late 1980s onwards. Probably there's a level beyond that too.

 

[Mart68]

Than it's about My Fi not Hi Fi.

To an extent, yes, but then isn't the personal experience really what matters? Does the circle of confusion not make absolute fidelity a pipe dream?

 

[Sokel]

A sad example about shows and the "mother" (classical) :

Tchaikovsky's - 1812 Overture (with Cannons), usually showing big-boi gear abilities but probably his worst work (for a lot of reasons)

I guess that somewhere, sometime ago someone heard it and said "Hey! that's gonna be awesome!"

Nope.

For us classical listeners these shows are a predetermined failure about our music.
It's either that gear can't do justice to it (small stuff good for someone crying with a small guitar as background ), the Harman list, the usual above, etc .
It's also the fact that the well recorded pianissimo do not fit a room full of noisy people.

But, there are brave ones who play on order, usually bigger gear which reps know they can play pretty much anything, Munich for example have lots of those.
The way I see it, shows are for friends and fun, music not so much, that's my mentality at them.

 

[Mnyb]

I cut losses on both sides of spectrum: I do not want my system to poorly reproduce well recorded music, and I do not want to listen music which was poorly recorded.

I think its kind of limitation many audiophiles have including myself which drives you to become and audiophile in the first place. The inability to listen to horrible sound .

The finer questions if its the source or the equipment comes later or may never resolve ?

I sometimes find it hard to listen to some music that I really like on a good system. I must resort to one of my lesser systems to cope or listen in the car ?

I sometimes wonder if i should build a garage system to belt out loud rock

 

[Vuki]

To an extent, yes, but then isn't the personal experience really what matters? Does the circle of confusion not make absolute fidelity a pipe dream?

Absolute fidelity is holy grail out of reach because of technology & acoustics. Circle of confusion is not the reason, otherwise perfect reproduction would be possible at least with some recordings.
But the reference is real sound not a pink noise! Nobody knows what does the pink noise sound like because "perfect" pink noise does not exist in the nature and can only be artificially created and reproduced. So every "referent" pink noise sound includes electromechanical reproduction.